The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by ddddd, Jul 15, 2020.

  1. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    5.8 ....looks very nice
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. bsowa1029

    bsowa1029 Franklin Half Addict

    5.2 on the most recent morgan.
    I like the smooth and full coverage of the toning. Nice colors and fairly vibrant.
     
  4. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    I'm at a 5.4. I love the color but the luster doesn't seem like it's as strong. I would still love to have something like this on my collection but I don't think it would command as strong of a premium like some other monsters out there.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2020
  5. wxcoin

    wxcoin Getting no respect since I was a baby

    A 6 on that 1883. I love the transition of color!
     
  6. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Here is another picture, under more intense light:

    17205FBD-19D0-4A49-BEA1-020074E5F52B.jpeg
     
  7. longshot

    longshot Enthusiast Supporter

    Well, I gotta go higher than the last oneo_O, so 5.9....definite monster.
     
  8. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Question: Is the grade appropriate, or would it grade higher? NGC star, and a 66? Should it be sent for CAC
     
    Mainebill likes this.
  9. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    My guess is that it would upgrade with today's market grading. It's no certainty, but the odds are in your favor (especially if the luster is strong). If the goal is to sell, PCGS with a TruView image seems to attract the most attention (from my experience-even if I don't agree with it). And CAC would help too (since it's not that large of an expense, there is little risk of trying).
     
  10. Mainebill

    Mainebill Bethany Danielle

    Pretty and strong. 5.8. I like. I’d just send to cac and keep it in its present holder
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  11. brg5658

    brg5658 Well-Known Member

    That one is 5.6 for me. Beautiful.
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  12. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    6, MONSTER
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  13. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Monster, 6.0. Not a famous coin, but could have been. Luster is good, not Moose-like, but then again, how many coins are?
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2020
    ddddd and LuxUnit like this.
  14. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    I think that's something I keep forgetting, I think we all should probably be rating more of these coins sixes. A 6 means it's a monster It doesn't mean that it's one of the top tier monsters and one of the most expensive coins on the market.

    IMO a coin can be monster toned and only be worth 3 to $500 if the luster and grade isn't there. I think this is where we're seeing a lot of differentiation in grades because to other people a Morgan may not be monster toned unless it's a $20,000 coin.

    What's even funnier is although I would consider lots of coins monster toned I've been grading them as if only $20,000 coins are monsters. I need to be less critical and think more about if I owned the coin how would I rate it.
     
    ddddd likes this.
  15. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    I agree. Although, toning is an extremely personal thing, and difficult to quantify. My feeling is that the word “monster” is overused, and has been become a numismatic cliche, just like “buy the coin, and not the holder.”

    There are many truths in these aphorisms, but then again, generalizing something that is very personal is difficult. Grading is more concrete—either a coin is gem uncirculated, or it isn’t. Even given the Sheldon scale, there are many different views on grading, and much variance.

    Numismatics is a very subjective hobby, and people approach it from many perspectives. Since collecting has an aspect of personal aesthetics to it, and that is extremely hard to quantify. Toning, is one of the biggest controversies in a hobby that rises and falls on personal taste.

    I think people are actually doing a good job of evaluating “how they see a coin.” We may agree, individually, and collectively, or we may not. However, there are no wrongs or rights in dealing with toned coins—it is basically personal.

    That being said, I do agree that there are more monsters than we think. So far, we have rated only one coin as a 6, as a group. That is the Moose.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2020
    ddddd likes this.
  16. kSigSteve

    kSigSteve Active Member

    Definite 6 for me. Nice coin!
     
  17. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    Summary Chapter 1
    Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62 [Obv]...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 3: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Rev]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 4: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 5: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS66* [Obv]...CT -> 3.2 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 6: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS?? [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 7: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 8: 1939-D Lincoln PCGS MS65RB [Obv]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 9: 1972-D Ike PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT-> 2.3 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
    Rd. 10: 1892 GB Half Crown PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 11: 1967 UK Half Crown PCGS MS65+ [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 12: 1963 Franklin NGC MS65+* FBL [Rev]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 13: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS63+ [Obv]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 14: 1899 GB 6 Pence PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 15: 1926 F.I.C. Piastre PCGS AU58 [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 16: 1904 USP Peso NGC PF62 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 17: 1944 Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 [Obv]...CT-> 4.8 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 18: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS 68+ [Obv]...CT-> 6 (Monster) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 20: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 21: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 22: 1941-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67* 5FS [Dual]...CT-> 4.9 (Mid-High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 23: 1961 Franklin 50c PCGS PR 65 [Dual]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 24: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 61* [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 25: 1941-D Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 FS [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 26: 1708 GB Shilling PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 27: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 28: 1835 10c PCGS AU58 [Rev]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 29: 1888 Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 30: 1904-O Morgan NGC MS64 [Dual]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 2 (Low-Mid)

    Summary Chapter 2
    Rd. 31: 1878 8tf Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 32: 1880-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
    Rd. 33: 1881-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 5.6 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 34: 1868 4D Mdy PCGS MS 65 [Dual]...CT-> 3.1 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 35: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 36: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 37: 1881-S Morgan Raw [obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.7 (Low)
    Rd. 38: 1877-CC Quarter PCGS AU 58 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.8 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 39: 1919 Franc PCGS MS 66 [Dual]...CT -> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 40: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 41: 1974-S Ike Raw [Obv]...CT -> 2.5 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 2.0 (Low-Mid)
    Rd. 42: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 43: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS64* [Dual]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.9 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 44: 1886 Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 45: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 46: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS67* [Dual]...CT -> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.5 (High)
    Rd. 47: 1888 Morgan Anacs MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 48: 1961 10c PCGS MS66+ [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 49*: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.9 (High)
    Rd. 50: 1884 Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.1 (Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 51: 1882-S Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.2 (Mid)
    Rd. 52: 1878-S Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.7 (Mid)
    Rd. 53: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 3.8 (Mid)
    Rd. 54^: 1901-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
    Rd. 55^: 1899-O Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 56: 1885-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 57: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.7 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    ______
    *Rd. 49 is presumed to be a juiced picture, so take the final scores with a grain of salt
    ^Rds. 54 & 55 are potentially pixelated pictures, which likely skewed the results
     
  18. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    What's interesting is that the term monster toned is over used and applied way too liberally but I believe on this thread we have swung in the other direction and are now being somewhat harder than average. I do think that the Moose being the 6.0 makes us under rate the other monster level coins.

    Does anyone want to try a chapter 3 where we revalue the Moose as 6.9 and then there would be more room for other monsters? Or will that cause too many issues where we start bumping coins of all levels (say something that would have been a 4.1 will be scored as a higher 4)?
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  19. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    I would agree with dividing the monster category into Monster—6.0, and ultra monster as 6.9. The Moose is not a normal heavy duty toner—it is the perfect toner. Not only does it have incredible toning, but it is actually undergraded at 68+. It is the closest thing I have seen to a MS 70 Morgan, and is really incomparable. There are 4 or 5 coins that should have been monsters, including Paul’s monster Jefferson.
     
    ddddd and longshot like this.
  20. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    37913197_Large.jpg

    Here's one we can do.
     
    ddddd likes this.
  21. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I like it (and used to have a similar one that was an 85-O).
    I'll go 4.8
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page